ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area Ideas?

In my opinion it seems very simple. Is the NEC a legal code in your area? If so, and if the job meets the NEC then it must be OK! No matter who wants what. If the NEC is legal code, then the NEC must be followed. IF the NEC is not legal code, then you must find out what (If any) rules/laws cover these issues. Then you would have to follow the rules/laws that do cover ths job.

Follow the local code. You're not a therapist. You can't make these guys work well together. All you can do is decide who's right and who's wrong on each issue.

There is no finding middle ground. It's right or it's not. Period.

It's best when the inspector and EC can get along and work with each other to come up with a safe installation. But that ship's sailed. Now you've got to nail them to the code book or a judge will later...with damages awarded.

Hi men, after reading these responses to the original post, I am curious about what the NEC is exactly. I know what the letters stand for, but let me tell about the NSPI so you'll know what I'm getting at.

NSPI stands for National Spa and Pool Institute. It is/was a national body that wrote standards concerning pool and spa safety at far as construction and use guidlines. Recently, NSPI was sued and was forced to re-organize under a bankruptcy filing and actually will cease to exist as NSPI. Certain standards were followed and yet accidents happened, so the orgainization was named in law suits and then forced to pay when courts found that the standards didn't protect the consumer in these specific cases.

Is the NEC similarly liable when it's standards are followed? Is it even an organization/entity that has assets or asset protection making it a deep pocket?

I'm not trying to hijack the topic here, but am wondering if AZSam is opening himself up to liability later if he lessens the protection advocated by the inspector[who I agree seems to be on a power trip, or is just trying to hide his ignorance]. Or, if he cites the NEC, is he aligning himself with a significant partner if libility issues come up.

Brad

NEC = National Electrical Code

"NEC = National Electrical Code"

Obviously, but what/who is behind it?

Government agency?

Industry spokes organization?

Private organization?

And, do they, or, does it have any teeth to defend it's standards against an attack from legal challenges if liability issues come up?

Brad

Brad, the NFPA is the organization that publishes the NEC but it is up to the local jurisdiction to adopt it into law. The NFPA is not responsible for the content of the NEC but 19 Code Making Panels and a Technical Correlating Committee write the Code. Proposals are submitted and the various Code Making Panels accept or reject those proposals.

The Panels are made up of various representatives from inspectors, NRTLs, manufacturers, utilities, labor, construction, etc. Each panel has a group of Article assigned to it so that the entire Code is covered and they deal with only those proposals that effect those Articles. There is a lengthy process to go through to get each proposal approved or rejected and then published.

After all that, it is up to the local jurisdiction to adopt the new Code or to make amendments to it. Indiana has several amendments so you have to be aware of what they are so you will not get a red tag for following the Code.

The process is much more complicated that I outlined but it is close.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Charlie Eldridge, Indianapolis, Utility Power Guy

And municipalities, counties, or states adopt the NEC as law. Most areas of the country have done this. That's where it gets it's authority. But it may have no authority where you are, depends on whether it was adopted or not.

Lots of organizations write "model" codes for electrical, fire protection, heating, structural, etc, etc. and they make these available to governments to adopt as law.

What the heck, make the triple threat happy....the new (two year old) GFI standards are intended to reduce nuisance tripping problems, so there's probable no harm in it.
As for the breaker issue, he ought to be happy if his push-button tester works.
Get the inspector to start visiting this forum before he gets contentious. It can get lonely when you're the only official "expert".
Another idea....have mayor "deputise" someone else -perhaps inspector from another town- to remove the issue of personal animosity from the inspection.

It sounds like there are really two issues at hand in this scenario. One is the technical details of a specific job. The other is the larger issue of a potentially longer-term and larger-scope dynamic where one person (the inspector) will interface with multiple people (EC's, homeowners, govt entities, etc.) toward common goals (hopefully) of safe installations and operating conditions.

With that in mind, you may have some working details of a negotiating dynamic:

a) Common ground or interests (the community, the electrical industry & all its activities, etc.).

b) Common goals (the community's welfare as well as the safety of the specific location, the govt's risk mgmt viewpoint of preventing disasters rather than dealing with the aftermath, etc),

c) Differences of opinion which give you opposing or disparate points on a spectrum that also are fortified by each entities 'basis of power or influence' which may include expertise, reputation, official authority, etc. (Meaning that they have an opinion and their opinion has the ability to either push progress forward or prevent progress if a disagreement ensues.)

On this last 'line' of the triad you may find the nuts & bolts of the process to accomplish your mission - finding out how to have disparate points join efforts to meet the needs in a) & b).

Start by identifying the following:

1) where on the spectrum each entity seems to be 'stuck' or standing firm - their opposing or disparate points. NEC references are one way to describe their position - "meets NEC" or "exceeds NEC", for example. Identify as many points as necessary.

2) where the entities agree. This gives you some rapport-building points that allow each entity to agree that they agree and that there are points which build respect between the two entities.

For the disparate points identify the following:
A) where or upon what specific issue each entity draws their position
(like "GFCI" for safety in the event of xyz which pushes outside the normal operating limits of the system or equipment)
B) where each entity 'draws the line' - meaning what will they absolutely not give up or give in to and,
C) where there may be room for (healthy) compromise.

If you can find even some small ways to bring the disparate points to closer agreement you may find that the men have more in common than they realize or more reasons to respect one another's opinion and that with common goals in mind, working out the relationship issues is a worthwhile endeavor. If done well, neither party sacrifices their dignity or reputation or the quality of their work and they both get credit for increasing the quality of effort that goes into meeting the common goals.